Mike Ryan2015-03-31T17:22:11-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/author/index.php?author=mike-ryanCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Mike RyanGood old fashioned elbow grease.'The Ice Pirates' To 'Guardians Of The Galaxy': Why Space-Themed Action-Adventure Movies Died 30 Years Agotag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-14T08:21:39-04:002014-03-14T08:59:01-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/talking about the prequels, but he made it clear that they wouldn’t be released anytime soon. (Lucas, at one point, said that he wanted to take two years off, then start production on “Episode I,” with an eventual release date of 1988. “Episode I” was finally released in 1999.) Children of that era (ahem) were already so scattershot with their attention spans, that they had moved on to G.I. Joe and Transformers for entertainment. By 1985, "Power of the Force"-labeled “Star Wars” action figures warmed retail-store pegs. (Which, today, are some of the most valuable because absolutely nobody bought them at the time.)

Nineteen Eighty-Four marked what would become the death throes for action-adventure movies set in space. There had been a flood of lesser movies trying to capitalize on the tone set by the original “Star Wars” trilogy: there was “Krull,” "The Last Starfighter,” “Megaforce,” and even a little-known gem that tried to capitalize on both “Star Wars” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” titled, of course, “Space Raiders.”

And, front and center, waving its space herpes-infected death rattle, was “The Ice Pirates,” which turns 30 years old on Sunday.

“The Ice Pirates” remains a bit of an anomaly today. In an age of unabashed nostalgia for anything, “The Ice Pirates” is largely unmentioned and unloved. Which is odd because “The Ice Pirates” was extremely popular with the 9 year olds of 1984. (I speak from experience.) Before I re-watched “The Ice Pirates” this week, the only thing I really remembered was a machine that would slice off a person’s scrotum with big chomping teeth (in fourth grade, this scene was discussed with an almost unhealthy resolve).

Having now re-watched “The Ice Pirates” –- and now being the same age that my father was when he took me to see "The Ice Pirates" –- a lot of things about my relationship with my father, as it pertains to our personal tastes concerning popular culture, makes a lot more sense now.

The first movie my parents ever took me to see in a theater was “The Empire Strikes Back.” The next year, in 1981, they took me to see a re-release of the original “Star Wars.” I know my father wasn’t a particular fan of “Star Wars,” but he tolerated it because they are genuinely entertaining movies. It’s when “The Last Starfighter” and “The Ice Pirates" came along -- movies that he, like so many others, thought were garbage -- that my father checked out. “The Ice Pirates” is a movie that only a 9-year-old could like –- and that’s why these types of movies died. (And, really, 9 year olds didn’t like “The Ice Pirates” -– they just liked that it reminded them of “Star Wars.”)

In 1977, space movies were getting nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. By 1984, “space movies” were dumb.

Like I said, I re-watched “The Ice Pirates” and, hoo boy, what a weird thing. The gist is a band of pirates –- led by Robert Urich as Jason (doing his best Han Solo impression), along with fellow pirates that include Anjelica Huston and Ron Perlman –- comb the galaxy looking for water. Okay! Not a bad premise! But Jason's pirates actually wear pirate costumes. And they have swords. Not laser swords, but just regular swords. In space.

This movie is insane. Jason and his team wind up being captured, then they are strapped onto some sort of assembly line that leads them to the dreaded scrotum-chomp machine –- you know, for kids -– before having to pretend they were castrated (they avoid the scrotum-chomp machine’s wrath) at some sort of elaborate space debutante ball.

Love scene dialogue includes gems like Jason saying, “I should take my saber off.” The princess (Mary Crosby) responds, “Let me. You’re so stiff. The belt, I mean.” (This is such a perfect euphemism because, if belts are known for anything, it’s being stiff?)

“The Ice Pirates” ends with (I swear I am not making this up) an elaborate fight scene as their spaceship travels through a time warp. The time warp causes all of the characters to age so much that, during this fight, Jason’s son is conceived, born, becomes an adult, and literally swoops in to save a now-elderly Jason. Oh, and Bruce Vilanch shows up.

(I should take a moment to point out that the director of “The Ice Pirates” is Stewart Raffill, the same man who directed “Mac and Me” and has supplied Paul Rudd with a lifetime of talk-show movie clips. So, Raffill can take full credit for restoring the “cute and nice alien” movie trend, too.)

The thing is, I don’t think anyone involved in “The Ice Pirates” really took it that seriously in the first place. It’s just bad timing that it came out when it did – followed by the slightly more serious, but still fun “The Last Starfighter -- because there really was a real opportunity to create new action-adventure stories that were set in space. It just so happened that no one quite knew how to pounce on the opening left by “Star Wars.” (I am not forgetting the “Star Trek” movies, but those already had an established fan base before “Star Wars” and, with the exception of “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home,” kind of lived in their own insular world.)

That’s not to say there wasn’t sci-fi, but the space adventures in theaters seemed, for all purposes, dead. Now, television picked up the slack. So much, in fact -– with shows like “Firefly” and “Battlestar Galactica -- that you may not even realize the dearth (other than the “Star Wars” prequels and “Star Trek” movies) that was levied upon the space opera.

In the last year, things have changed dramatically. It’s easy to point at “Gravity” as a turning point for these types of movies. And it certainly helps, but its action still occurs pretty close to Earth and -– as unbelievable as some scenes may actually be –- it’s still based in at least some sort of hyper-stylized version of reality.

The real test is Marvel’s “Guardians of the Galaxy.” Sort of. I mean, it is the very definition of the kind of action-adventure movie this entire piece has been about, but it’s also a Marvel movie set in the current “Iron Man,” “Thor,” Captain America,” “Avengers” timeline. So, even if a person were not normally going to see “Guardians of the Galaxy” movie, they’re probably going to think, Well, it’s a sequel to “Captain America: The Winter Soldier,” so I need to see it. It’s a test, but the true test comes for whatever, if anything, tries to follow “Guardians” (not counting “Star Wars: Episode VII”).

Whatever it is, let’s just hope it’s not a remake of “The Ice Pirates” ... I’ve seen enough scrotum-chomp machines for a lifetime.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Christian Slater On 'Nymphomaniac' And His Hopeful Next Chaptertag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-13T13:59:29-04:002014-03-13T19:59:01-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/also knows how important it is for him to be co-starring in a Lars von Trier movie.

Oh, yes, that controversial Lars von Trier movie: In "Nymphomaniac" (which has been divided into two separate films for theatrical release), Slater plays the father of a woman named Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg), whose sexual evolution is told in flashback -- detailing her sexual origin from youth until her experiences as a mature woman. (Stacy Martin plays Joe as a young adult.) For Slater, this was an opportunity to work with one of the most interesting directors in the world, and, yes, an opportunity to hopefully do more work in film in the future. (A role that the still youthful-looking Slater had to convince Von Trier that he was old enough to play.) This was, as Slater puts it, an opportunity to enjoy the roller-coaster ride without being on the roller coaster.

In a sometimes serious, sometimes loose conversation, Slater looks back on his career -- reflecting fondly over films such as "Heathers" and "Pump Up the Volume." Also, Slater, a lifelong Trekkie, reveals his understandable man-crush for Benedict Cumberbatch.

He does pick interesting actors to be in his movies. Did he come to you?
This presented itself because my agent was in Denmark doing some kind of seminar about Hollywood ... and he took the trip out to Lars' studio and met with his people -- and I think Lars -- and talked about this movie and this project and he threw my name into the hat, really. I think they said, "Hm, wow, we didn't really think of him, but that could be interesting. Can he play a father? Is he old enough?"

That's a good point. I still kind of think of you as 25.
Yeah! I know! Weird! It's funny, so, to get this sort of opportunity to play a man and a father was thrilling.

Were you worried you didn't look old enough?
You know, when my agent told me that was one of the concerns they had, I took it upon myself to steal some of my wife's makeup and I put some dark circles under my eyes and sent them a photo. And that's when they said, "Oh, okay, we'll hire him."

That has to be a nice feeling though -- that you had to apply makeup just to look old enough to play a father.
You know, I had to do something because I think it is so hard for people to maybe get over that particular image. Certainly, you're right, I've been in this business for so long ...

You don't want to send them a picture from "Young Guns II."
Yeah! Yeah, exactly. So, to rip that up and tear those pictures up and try to recreate and do something new and morph myself into something else is really challenging. I mean, it's really challenging. So, when this part presented itself I was thrilled to get that chance. And then after meeting Lars, I felt safe and comfortable in his hands to really do whatever I could to help him convey whatever image he was trying to convey.

Maybe "struggle" is a strong word, but has it been a struggle to get these kinds of roles?
Oh, struggle, man. Struggle. No, it's hard. Nobody wants you to -- it's just hard. It's hard to break out of people's preconceived notions of who you are.

What do you think those preconceived notions are?
I think it's "bad boy." You know, a lot of labels get attached to you from an early age -- mistakes that you made and hurdles that you have to overcome. And it's hard to get filmmakers or studios or studio executives to take that leap of faith and take that sort of risk. I mean, it is a risk, you know? I've had to do -- which I've been grateful for -- but I've had a lot of wonderful experiences in going to London and doing theater. Those have been some of the best, most fulfilling experiences that I've gotten to have -- and they've been wonderful. But, with theater, it's definitely a fleeting thing because you have those moments -- and it's not film. It doesn't reach a mass audience or a mass market. You invite people to come see it, but, still, it's not as helpful as doing something like [film].

How do you convey to people that the "bad boy" stigma is from a while ago? Can you just say that?
Look, I don't know necessarily how it works, but I think you just maintain a faith and belief. I mean, acting is what I love to do.

And being in a Lars von Trier movie should help ...
And, look, I only have my agent to thank for it. He's the one who threw my name out there. And then Lars was the one who was willing to kind of take that risk and be that director who was willing to give an actor an opportunity and a chance. And all I wanted to do was just everything I just possibly could to show up for it.

Do you look at this as a comeback?
I mean, I've always worked. And I've always tried to do good work. And I've loved a lot of the people that I've gotten the opportunity to work with, but I think working with somebody like Lars is very special and very unique. And I think as an actor, I'm addicted to it. It's like, I kind of don't want to do anything else other than work with a director that I respect.

There are a lot of actors who do that. Bill Murray ...
Sure. "I have a private number, call me and if I'm interested ..."

Well, you've done one now.
It's certainly a wonderful, maybe new foundation for me. I feel like that is definitely a place to build from. Like, I'd love to be able to continue to go and find interesting characters and things that I can immerse myself in and scare myself with and take some chances with. I mean, I think that's what it is to get to be an actor. We take chances and we take risks and we don't care if we fall on our faces and we try to push the envelope as much as possible.

I'm going to put this out there: "Pump Up the Volume" was 15 years ahead of its time.
Oh, wow. Thanks.

It's about an illegal radio broadcast, but it's basically what the Internet became.
Right! It's true, right.

I don't know if you ever think about that movie.
Without a doubt, that is one of my favorite movies that I got the chance to do as well. I mean, I was a kid and I did "The Name of the Rose" and I did "Heathers," I did "Pump Up the Volume" -- I mean, I got the chance to really do some special projects. They were special to me. So, it's been a wild life. It's a roller-coaster ride. I think, for me, I have to sometimes make sure I'm not riding the roller coaster. You know, I can watch the roller coaster, but I can't get in the cart. Otherwise I'm in serious trouble.

Do you feel you used to be in the cart?Oh yeah. Sure, sure. Sometimes you get in the cart and you go on this crazy ride and you're sort of a part of it and you have to be able to step off the ride.

You mention that slate of movies. Even your first movie, "The Legend of Billie Jean" -- back when people thought you were actually Helen Slater's little brother -- is still played once a week on cable. I would imagine that can be difficult for someone who is young.
Sure. You know, life is a wild journey -- there is no doubt about it. This business is very tricky. Navigating through it is very tricky. I think one of the best things that I've been able to do for myself is get out of Hollywood. Moving away from the epicenter of a lot of the chaos and craziness is very helpful. Living in Miami and having some distance and separation between me and Sunset Boulevard is wonderful. Really good.

I am still surprised every time you pop up for that cameo in "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country."
[Laughs] Yeah!

I know you're a "Trek" guy, why have you never done a larger "Trek" role?
You know, it comes down to the guys who are in charge and timing and working those things out. I would love to do something on "Star Trek" or "Star Wars" or any of those types. I mean, working with J.J. Abrams would be ...

So you like the new "Star Trek" movies.
It's different. I think it's good. You know who I really love right now? Benedict Cumberbatch. That guy -- I started watching that "Sherlock" show. He's my man-crush. There's no doubt about it.

I think you just gave me a headline idea.
Oh, I did? Oh shit.

"Christian Slater's Man-Crush is Benedict Cumberbatch."
But isn't that okay? I mean, the guy is great. I love him and I'd love to work with him. He's wonderful.

He has a good humor about himself. I've interviewed him before ...
Really?

For "Star Trek," actually.
Nice!

Wonderful man.
Oh, good. That's nice to hear!

No, not a dick.
Not a dick! Fantastic! So good! It comes through! You can see, the guy's performances are genuine and real. The BBC and the shows that they do are so good. Are you a fan of "Doctor Who?"

I've never watched it. I know people love it.
I wasn't a "Doctor Who" fan until my son, actually, turned me on to it. This actor, Matt Smith: great! If you're into that sci-fi stuff or whatever, it's really excellent.

It's intimidating because the show has been on the air for so long.
You can!

Like when there's a new Doctor?
Yeah, you can. It starts fresh. You'll see! You've got to check it out. Just watch the first episode, you'll love it.

I will wind up doing it now, just so I can say. "Yeah, I didn't watch it until Christian Slater talked me into it."
[Laughs] You'll love it, dude.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Marvel Studios Head Kevin Feige On The Future Of 'Doctor Strange'tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-13T08:29:04-04:002014-03-13T08:59:01-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/still doesn't have an official release announcement is "Doctor Strange." (Eagle-eyed Marvel fans, however, should keep an eye out for an Easter egg in the upcoming "Captain America: The Winter Soldier.") On Wednesday, we spoke to Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige (the full interview will publish closer to the release of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier") who gave us an update on the status of Dr. Stephen Strange, going as far to admit that he'd be surprised at this point if a "Doctor Strange" movie doesn't happen.

Also, it's already known that in the upcoming "Avengers: Age of Ultron," Elizabeth Olsen and Aaron Taylor-Johnson play the mutants Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, respectively. The only problem is, the term "mutants" can't be used because that word belongs to Fox, which owns the rights to X-Men. Now, Internet speculation is running wild with the talk of the Inhumans being used as a possible future movie and also a way to skirt around the use of the term mutant. Feige addresses these questions as well.

Is it fair to say that, at this point, it would be surprising to you if there wasn't a Doctor Strange movie in the next two or three years?
So, we're in 2014 now ...

It just feels like this one is so close to being official, yet it's not.
It's time. It's time. I would be surprised if that were the case, yeah. Maybe three or four years, yeah, we'll see. But, I would like it to be the case. Much like Vin Diesel, I like it when something finally happens, and then we can talk about what it is -- versus rumors of what it could be or should be or isn't yet [laughs].

Though, the difference this time, as opposed to Vin Diesel, is that you don't have Doctor Strange taunting you on his Facebook page.
[Laughing] Exactly!

[...]

With Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in "Avengers: Age of Ultron" and the situation over the word "mutant" with Fox, there's some speculation that this might be a way to introduce the Inhumans.
Well, Inhumans is something that we are definitely thinking about and we think there's great potential there for a great movie. But, no, no -- we have not linked those two.

So using the Inhumans would have nothing to do with getting around the word "mutant"?
As it relates to Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver? No. No, no, no.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Scarlett Johansson Confirms There Will Be No Delays In Shooting 'Avengers: Age Of Ultron'tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-12T14:25:32-04:002014-03-13T12:59:01-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/another inevitable blockbuster, "Avengers: Age of Ultron" -- in which, like the new "Captain America," Johansson is supposed to have another large and physically demanding role -- and if this news will lead to any delays in the shooting.

On Wednesday afternoon, we spoke to Johansson (the full interview will publish closer to the release of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier"), who did her best to put everyone's minds at ease that the Black Widow will be a-okay. Johansson clarifies:

Everything for "Avengers 2" -- we're full steam ahead. We start shooting in three weeks and I'm stunt training and we're good to go. You know, I think it's something that is [laughing] hard to talk about, exactly. You know, trying to skirt around your question exactly [laughs] -- and, you know, doing a poor job of it. But, you know, like I said, everything is exactly on schedule [...] [Laughs] Everything is going just fine. The Black Widow always wins and will continue to.

[CLARIFICATION: An earlier version of this story stated that Johansson had announced her pregnancy, but she herself has not yet made a formal announcement.]

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>In Defense of 'Need For Speed,' More Or Lesstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-12T13:06:07-04:002014-03-12T23:59:01-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/Why do I keep thinking about this dumb movie!?

And then I ran across "Smokey and the Bandit" on television and everything made sense.

In his curmudgeonly review of "Need for Speed," Jordan Hoffman points out that, "Much of the movie's run time, actually, is just Tobey getting to the race."

While this is true, it is also by far the best aspect of the movie.

The aforementioned Tobey Marshall, portrayed by Aaron Paul, is our "Need for Speed" hero. Tobey owns a small garage and street races at night to help pay the mortgage. Then an old adversary named Snidely Racefast (which may or may not be the actual name of the character played by Dominic Cooper) shows up to offer Tobey and his buddies a lot of money to help build a Shelby Mustang.

Yes, the first 45 minutes are asinine. The movie starts as a rip-off of the "Fast and Furious" movies -- only with the addition of a zooming camera and the subtraction of "fun to watch" -- before it branches out into some lame-brain subplot involving the death of one of Tobey's friends after a high-speed accident caused by Snidely Racefast. (The character who dies might as well have been wearing a red Starfleet uniform. His character name should have been "Mitch Dead.")

But at that point something interesting happens. In a kind of convoluted plot twist that involves significant jail time for Tobey and a secret car race, he finds himself with a short amount of time to get a Shelby Mustang GT and its owner, Julia (Imogen Poots), from New York to San Francisco. All of a sudden, "Need for Speed" transforms into a cross-country race against time, with the police in hot pursuit.

This is awfully similar to getting a truckload of Coors from Texas to Georgia.

Okay, yes, "Smokey and the Bandit" is kind of a dumb movie, but it's not without its charms: the use of America's wide-open interstate highway system makes it immensely entertaining (not to mention Burt Reynolds in his prime). When "Need for Speed's" cross-country action kicks in, it triggered a sense of nostalgia for this genre of movie that I didn't know existed.

That nostalgia also kind of a problem for "Need for Speed," because its target audience doesn't really exist anymore: namely, adolescent boys in the late 1970s, preferably who have posters of dirt bikes on their bedroom walls. If this movie had been released a few decades ago, it would have played well as a poor man's "Smokey" with some cooler car crashes. (All of the car stunts are real, which also plays into those feelings of nostalgia.) All that's missing is a catchy Jerry Reed song.

But the movie makes such a big deal about this stupid race, one can't blame the audience for thinking the movie is about the race instead about getting to the race, which is it's really about. ("Need for Speed" also has a similarities to, of all things, "National Lampoon's Vacation." If the viewer is under the impression that the only thing that matters is Wally World, yeah, it's going to be frustrating that the Griswolds keep stopping along the way. Also, both movies have an elaborate car jump scene.)

"Need for Speed" should have just gone "all in" on the cross-country/nostalgia concept and done away with the nonsense that bookends this movie. I mean, the movie is all nonsense, but at least the race against time is fun. "Need for Speed" is trying to cloak itself in the noise and flash of "Fast and Furious" when it should have just owned its inner Bo "Bandit" Darville. Instead, it's just pissed everyone off.

The reviews have been pretty unforgiving, but it seems a little unfair to admonish a movie like "Need for Speed" when we look back at "Smokey and the Bandit" so fondly. Ultimately it's the movie's own fault for not being upfront about what it is: a throwback to the days of Burt Reynolds and Sally Field driving a cool car trying to outrun police officers.

Earlier this week, I was debating the merits of "Need for Speed" vs. "Smokey and the Bandit" and "The Cannonball Run" with the aforementioned Hoffman, who asked at one point, "Did those other films have such a blatant disregard for safety and public works?"

In response, I emailed him back a YouTube video of The Bandit racing through a roller coaster, inevitably resulting in its destruction. (And yes, historians, I'm aware that particular scene takes place in "Smokey and the Bandit Part II.") But that's the problem with "Need for Speed" -- the audience for this movie has left this genre in the dust. When "Smokey and the Bandit" came out, we all wanted to be Burt Reynolds; in 2014, we'd rather see his character get a ticket.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Your TV Series Finale Sucks (Even Though It Probably Doesn't)tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-11T08:11:41-04:002014-03-11T10:59:01-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/
It’s also remarkable that, in only eight episodes, “True Detective” managed to piss off the Internet with its finale -– something also usually reserved for a series that has logged quite a few seasons. Yet, after Sunday’s finale, there it was: The now-commonplace complaints that a finale didn’t live up to expectations. The problem is, we’re never again going to get a so-called “great” finale. The Internet will make sure of it.

This isn’t a criticism of the Internet or social media. There’s a good chance that a show like “True Detective” may have gone unnoticed if it weren’t for the Internet. It’s usually the Internet’s love for a television show that results in its eventual doom.

The problem is, a fan of any particular show will read online scenario after scenario of what could happen in an upcoming finale (I am guilty of contributing to this problem) and, inevitably, that person will find a scenario that he or she really likes ... and then he or she will be upset when it doesn’t happen. (And I firmly believe this trend started with “Lost.” I have a hard time believing we’d have read as many think-piece theories last week about The Yellow King -– which really wasn’t supposed to be much of a mystery -- if it weren’t for all of the think-piece theories that came before about the numbers 4, 8, 15, 16, 23 and 42.)

The first season of TRUE DETECTIVE runs 8 episodes and 8,000 thinkpieces.

I brought all of this up to Slate’s television critic, Willa Paskin (partially just to find out if I’m being insane), and she responded, “Yeah, I think this is real. I've been thinking about it, too. I think the explanation is two fold: one, we are all paying a lot more attention, doing a lot more thinking about what we want in a finale, a lot more aware of other finales. Our expectations are too high. We're looking for something specific. We're not as open minded as we should be. And people making the show are aware of our expectations and that can lead to swinging for the fences, wildly, or playing it safe, boringly.”

Paskin is dead-on right about the showrunners being aware. Even if a showrunner somehow forces himself or herself not to be aware, then he or she is consciously aware that he or she is going out of the way to not be aware. In other words: In 2014, it’s impossible to ignore one way or another. It’s like trying to ignore the guy at the bar yelling at you, “Hey, underpants.” It’s mature to say, “I’m not listening,” but you’re also lying.

The finale of “The Sopranos” was criticized for its ambiguous ending. But, when a series shrouds its finale in ambiguity, at least it allows us to shoehorn in our preferred resolution. Did Tony Soprano live? Did Tony Soprano die? Whatever you wanted to happen in that particular scenario, well, a case can be made either way. People love to say that they hated the "Sopranos”’ ending, but I suspect even those people secretly love it because we are still talking about it seven years later. Today, I really do think people get upset when a finale doesn’t give a viewer enough to talk about.

By giving us a straightforward finale, “True Detective” didn’t let us have our moment. “But what about that crazy theory I read last week? I liked that! You mean this show was only about the relationship between two detectives?” It’s as if everyone wants everything to end like “The Sixth Sense.”

Even the “Breaking Bad” finale, which received a generally positive reaction, was criticized for being too tidy. If the finale of “M*A*S*H” aired today –- a finale of a drama-comedy that’s regarded as one of the best to ever air -– people would have been mad that B.J. spelled out “Goodbye” with the rocks. “Why wasn’t it something more vague? I read a theory that it was going to spell out ‘I am the Yellow King.’ Why didn’t Hawkeye’s helicopter explode?” It has become impossible to win.

“Social media makes us aware of everyone else's opinion and complete fractures the illusion of consensus,” added Paskin. “You can always find someone who hates something (or loves it). I'm sure if ‘M*A*S*H’ were on now, some people would have hated it, and we would know about their hate.”

I asked my HuffPost colleague Mo Ryan about this (still seeking more validation) and she theorized that this may be true, but there’s a large difference between how people react to finales based on whether it’s a drama or a comedy. “There's a huge split in the drama realm, almost every time around,” Ryan said. “There are those who want the story elements to line up and be tied off neatly, and there are those who want the characters to get some kind of resolution. People may want a mixture of those two things, but those seem to be the two ends of the spectrum. Comedies have an easier time of it because it's 90 percent about the resolution of the characters' lives. In many of them, there’s not really a mythology or big plot structure to service.”

Paskin, too, said she thinks it’s still possible for comedies to escape the Internet’s web of love-wrath. “I think the stakes on comedy finales are just much, much lower. Who even remembers? It's just not the culmination of a story in the same way.”

Which is interesting, because when I posed this same question to Will Leitch, he listed three comedies, “’30 Rock’ did it perfect, ‘Eastbound and Down’ did too, and I bet ‘Parks and Recreation’ will too.” Then he added, “If you're asking if there will ever be universal 100 percent agreement on the Internet that something was perfect, well, no. But I think the fact that people feel pressured to come up with ANGLES! and HOT TAKES! on things assured that long ago.”

Leitch’s point about angles! is valid. (Again, I’m as guilty as anyone.) But I do believe the real problem comes from us, the person who loves a particular television show. It’s easy to make fun of fanboy culture (a culture I admittedly dabble in from time to time), but complaining about Rust Cohle’s final motivations is absolutely no different than complaining about Superman’s motives at the end of “Man of Steel.” In 2014, we are all fanboys. Serialized television is no different than serialized comic books and, yes, there is an investment in these characters and, if we love them enough, nothing will be good enough for them ... even if it comes from the person who created those characters. We feel a weird sense of entitlement to the things we like.

To this point, Lane Brown, the culture editor at New York magazine, elaborated, “Part of the problem is that most TV shows now are serialized (as opposed to episodic), which means series finales are the endings of 60-hour stories instead of hour-long ones, and there's lots of extra pressure.” Brown also blamed the phenomena of the anti-hero: “Most of the shows we like now are about antiheroes (or at least screwed-up protagonists) whose appeal is that we can hate and love them at the same time. Series finales require a showrunner make a definitive final judgment about his/her main character (Walter White either walks free or gets punished), which is bound to disappoint at least half of the audience.”

Brown then astutely pointed out something I had never really considered, “It's probably not an accident that the shows that the Internet remembers most fondly (‘Freaks & Geeks,’ ‘My So-Called Life,’ ‘Veronica Mars,’ ‘Party Down,’ ‘Arrested Development’ until it came back, etc.) are the ones that never got endings.”

So, it’s kind of official: Your finale will suck, even if it doesn’t. That’s just the way it is now. (Sorry, Matt Weiner.) But, you know, that’s okay, because your show probably wouldn’t have had the opportunity to have a finale that everyone hates if it weren’t for all of those people who now hate your finale. So, it really does seem like the only winning move (oh my God, I’m really going to paraphrase Joshua from “WarGames,” aren’t I? Yes, I am) ... is not to have a finale.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>'SNL' Scorecard: Did Lena Dunham's Show Live Up To The Hype?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-09T10:42:06-04:002014-03-09T11:59:29-04:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/fine as a host – some of her sketches were funny, some weren’t; like pretty much any other show – though I suspect that her performance will be maddeningly over-analyzed because it’s Lena Dunham and that kind of thing seems to happen to her. (Oh, see, Nikki Finke has already done just that, tweeting, “One of the worst hosts of one of worst SNL shows.” I mean, that’s insanity.) Anyway, let's take a look at this week's Scorecard, shall we?

Sketch of the Night

”Ohh Child” (Killam, Thompson, Strong, Dunham, Wheelan) First of all, it really is impossible to get a good car sing-along going when GPS is constantly interrupting the song. I’m not always a fan of the tacked-on sketch ending that has nothing to do with the rest of the sketch – in this case, the joke of Dunham constantly being interrupted by the GPS turns into the fact that that the foursome is going to kill Brooks Wheelan. But, whatever, this one worked.

Score: 9.0

The Good

”What’s Poppin’” (Thompson, Pharoah, O’Brien, Bryant, Strong, Dunham) Aidy Bryant’s sad delivery of the line, “Hey, my flute amp,” may have been the funniest non-McConaughey moment of the entire show. And it’s great when Mike O’Brien gets something on the air – it’s just a spectacle of weird and this certainly qualifies. Also, “Tim” is a fantastic rap name.

Score: 7.5

”Weekend Update” (Strong, Jost, Killam, Bayer, Armisen) First, Taran Killam’s Matthew McConaughey was a highlight of the show. Killam nails McConaughey’s manic digressions and wisely doesn’t overdo the more easily parodied cartoonish elements of McConaughey’s persona. And, look, I’m a fan of Armisen and Bayer’s “friends of a tyrant” characters, but with a crowded enough cast already (I wrote about this problem this week), it was a little odd seeing Armisen pop back up for a character that wasn’t 100 percent necessary to see again.

Colin Jost was better than last week, but for whatever reason he’s not being allowed to do something that would show off his personality. (Since he’s the co-head writer, perhaps this is his own decision.) He reminds be of a backup quarterback who has just entered the game and has been told to just hand the ball off to the running back until he feels comfortable. Well, eventually he’s going to have to throw a pass downfield.

Score: 7.0

”Scandal” (Zamata, Dunham, Bennett, Pharoah, McKinnon, Strong, Killam) So … people who love “Scandal” seemed to really like this sketch. I do not watch “Scandal” so I had pretty much no idea what was going on. Regardless, there were still a couple of funny jokes in there for people like me.

Score: 7.0

”Cold Open: Obama Ukraine Address” (Pharoah, Neeson) Liam Neeson is really starting to own this whole “I’m Mr. Tough Guy” persona. I think part of Neeson believes that Putin might see this sketch and actually think twice about his actions. Actually, at this point, Neeson might be right in thinking this way.

Score: 6.5

”Biblical Movie” (Dunham, Killam) There was little chance that we were going to get through the night without seeing Taran Killam’s Adam Driver – which is good, because Killam does a great Adam Driver. I mean, I get it, “SNL” had to do some sort of “Girls” parody at some point in the evening (or they didn’t have to, I guess) and this was fine. Though, this feels like one of those sketches that I’m supposed to like – hey, it skewered a contemporary example of popular culture! – than a sketch that I actually do like.)

Score: 6.5

The Bad

”What Are You Even Doing” (Pedrad, Dunham, Moynihan, Mooney, Hamm) Well, Jon Hamm showed up, so that’s fun. You know, I get the feeling that his look of “What am I doing here?” wasn’t 100 percent acting, in that, “Of all of the sketches I could be used for, this is the one you choose?” (Kind of incredibly, all of the cameo appearances aside, Jon Hamm hasn’t hosted “SNL” since October of 2010.) I didn’t love this sketch, but I hope they try it again at some point. It just feels like a recurring sketch with a lot of potential that isn’t quite there yet. (Well, except for Bobby Moynihan, who looks like he’s been playing that part for ten years.)

Score: 5.5

”The Katt Williams Show” (Pharoah, Wheelan, Dunham, Killam, Wells) Yeah, I kind of had a feeling that with Dunham hosting that it would be a rough night for Noël Wells. And, here, she got to do her Lena Dunham impression, which just seemed a little odd. Dunham was fine as Liza Minnelli – she perhaps hammed it up a bit too much, but it’s not like Dunham is known for her ability to do impressions, so good on her for even attempting this. Taran Killam’s unfocused Harrison Ford is, sadly, about right. But, in the end, this all just felt like “an excuse to do impressions.”

Score: 5.0

”Lena Dunham Monologue” (Dunham, Bayer, Bryant, Moynihan, McKinnon) Dunham seemed nervous at first – which is fair! – then seemed to settle into her monologue. The problem is the concept of the cast revealing their sex secrets to Dunham went nowhere and actually made little sense.

Score: 5.0

”Concert Tickets” (Bennett, Mooney, Wheelan) Honestly, this just feels like a lesser version of some of the other shorts that Bennett and Mooney have put on throughout the season. It’s like, here’s our quirky concept (in this case, Will Smith tickets); here’s our monotone banter; here’s where we talk to a normal person who is confused by all of this (in this case, Brooks Wheelan). I like Bennett and Mooney and these two have come the closest out of all of the new cast members in actually making a real impact on the show, I just wish they’d do something new.

(Not online due to song rights issues.)

Score: 3.0

The Ugly

”Jewelry Party” (Strong, O’Brien, Bryant, Dunham, Pedrad, Bayer) Boy, this was a dud. It’s like someone decided that there needed to be a sketch about “issues,” but forgot to add any comedy. Then, at the last minute, someone realized there wasn’t any comedy so it was decided that Cecily Strong would do “a voice.” It was really weird: Instead of satirizing the goofy concept of “men’s rights,” they put poor Mike O’Brien in the sketch and he comes off as a nice guy (it’s impossible for O’Brien not to come off as a nice guy) while everyone tells him he’s awful. Where’s the joke? It was interesting to see “SNL” get somewhat political, but this feels like a huge missed opportunity.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter. Click below for this week's "SNL," Not Ready For Primetime Podcast featuring Mike Ryan and Hitfix's Ryan McGee.

But one of my biggest pet peeves in life are people who point to the original five years of "SNL" as some sort of bastion of comedy that could never be replicated by the current cast (and "current cast" can refer to any combination of actors since the departure of original cast).

This is nonsense.

What people remember about that original cast are the classic sketches that have been replayed hundreds of times since they originally aired. But if you go back and watch those shows in their entirety, you'll notice a familiar pattern: Some sketches are great, some are good, some are bad. Those early seasons pretty much established the rhythm of the show that you still watch today.

What those seven original cast members had going for them is that they were such large personalities -- and that there were only seven of them. The audience got to know them. Even when a sketch failed, the audience felt more of a connection with the cast members in that failed sketch, so maybe it didn't seem quite so bad.

The current "SNL" cast has 17 cast members. And that's a problem.

Now, this gets tricky because I would never advocate that anyone on the show lose his or her job. Every single person that lands a job on "SNL" has (most likely) just achieved his or her dream. So I'm absolutely not going to sit here behind a computer screen and scold a new cast member for not having enough airtime this season. Especially because there are 17 (!) cast members. It was hard enough for new featured players to get their work on the air when the show had 12 or more cast members. Now, with 17, it seems almost futile.

But! This also means that we are sitting here in March -- 14 full episodes into the season -- and this particular cast has no real group personality. It's almost impossible to get to know these guys because we see them so sporadically. I've covered "SNL" on a weekly basis for four years and I've watched this show my entire life, and I've never felt so unfamiliar with the cast.

When Lorne Michaels was asked about the diversity problem on "SNL" in a recent interview with Lane Brown of New York magazine, he responded, "This past year, having lost Fred [Armisen], Jason Sudeikis, and Bill Hader and knowing I was losing Seth, we were focused on finding guys."

But the problem is that Lorne replaced three "guys" with five "guys," along with Noël Wells and Sasheer Zamata. And it's great that Lorne finally hired an African-American woman, but she's been thrown in with such a large cast, her presence really hasn't been felt -- nor has that of pretty much every other new cast member. Each actor's contribution has been stunted by the bottleneck in front of the camera.

The last time the cast was anywhere near this large was way back in the disastrous 1994-95 season. That cast, too, had 17 members, but never at one time. (The largest the cast got at any point was 15.) That season was crowded, bloated and filled with a strange mix of long-standing members like Mike Myers; top dogs like Adam Sandler and Chris Farley; and new cast members who were already veteran comedians, like Chris Elliot and Michael McKean.

After that season Michaels cleaned house and brought in an almost entirely new cast for the 1995-96 season. Michaels was smart enough then to keep the cast to a modest 11 cast members (later expanding to 14 toward the end). At that size, it gave the audience a chance to get to know the new cast members, and stars like Will Ferrell, Cheri Oteri, Molly Shannon and Darrell Hammond quickly emerged.

In the 2005-06 season, the cast briefly reached 16 cast members when Kristen Wiig joined mid-season, but by the next season the cast was cut down to 11 again.

I've heard rumblings that some current cast members are frustrated at their lack of airtime. And that's understandable: This might be the most difficult season in the show's history in which to make a name for yourself. Instead of going with the "let's give this cast room to breathe" strategy of '95-96, It's almost as if Michaels went with a strategy of "let's throw a bunch of them against the wall and something will stick."

The problem is the wall is too small and nothing is sticking.

The frustrations are likely not limited to the cast; the audience is also frustrated, because we like getting to know the cast members. And I don't know what the short-term solution is. It's not like there's a large swath of veteran cast members who are going to leave the show soon. This cast is filled with young talent, but not enough airtime to accommodate all of it. Sure, everyone seems to have featured in a highlight or two -- most notably Beck Bennett and Kyle Mooney -- but the show is too crowded now to gather any momentum ... and that's a shame for them and a shame for us.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>How Eva Green Absolutely Stole '300: Rise Of An Empire'tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-06T09:22:26-05:002014-03-06T09:59:01-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/little more rare, though, in a big-budget, visual-effects driven vehicle like this weekend's "300: Rise of an Empire." Yet it happens there because of Eva Green. She owns this movie.

Green -- who rose to prominence after playing Vesper Lynd in 2006's "Casino Royale" -- will never be accused of phoning in this performance. She struts and swashbuckles her way through this "300" sequel with confidence and gusto. Actually, "sequel" isn't quite the right word here. Green plays Artemisia, a commander of the Persian navel forces who battle the Greeks at the same time as the events of the original "300" are playing out. (Many times during this film, we will see glimpses of Gerard Butler's King Leonidas and even Michael Fassbender's Stelios.)

For being such an overwhelming force on screen (at one point Artemisia makes out with a decapitated head of a man she had just killed), Green, in real life, could almost be described as shy -- and when we spoke, she hadn't even seen the movie yet because she doesn't like watching herself in movies. Boy, is she in for a treat.

I love that you went "all in" with this movie.
Oh, thank you ... I haven't had a chance to see the movie yet. That's terrible -- I'll see it at the premiere.

So you don't even know how good you are in this yet, do you?
Oh, I don't like watching myself. But thank you for the kind words.

Why not?
Oh, God. I don't know. I'm very self-conscious, or something. Maybe it's kind of a narcissistic thing, but not in a good way. I just can't watch myself. You know how some actors when they film, they go straight to the monitor and kind of go, "Okay." I should learn and do it -- maybe one day [laughs].

But that's the opposite of narcissism, right?
Oh, yeah. It's like negative narcissism, or something. Yeah, it's weird. It's a paradox. I like doing it, but not watching me. And I'll see it definitely on Tuesday and all of that hard work -- the training -- I can't wait to see the fights. That's the most exciting thing I'd like to see.

Well, you look like you know what you're doing with a sword.
We worked so hard, my God. So, that's good. I mean, it was all green screen, so you don't know what they've done with it. I saw the trailer and it looks like paintings and it looks gorgeous -- like a total different film.

The way you mention the hard work, it almost sounds like relief that it's over.
It was hard work! I mean, the main appeal for me to do this film was the physical stuff because I'm so not physical. I run every day and all this, but that was a big challenge to do the core work in the morning and squat and things like that. Actually, my favorite bit was learning how to fight with three swords ... the thing is, when you finish shooting, it's like a drug and you don't do it every day anymore. And your body kind of asks for it again. I asked my trainer what I should do -- what kind of sports would be good for me -- and he said that boxing would actually be good for me.

Are you going to box?
I'd like to hit! But, I don't think I'd like to receive them.

You should do this.
Or Thai boxing, with the legs and everything. I'd be into that.

When you get a script like this for an over-the-top, stylized kind of movie, do you say to yourself, "I can't half ass this."
I mean, I was worried a bit at the beginning of not being believable as a woman commander.

Why would you think that?
You know, to have the authority to be believable -- because you have all of these strong men and have to be believable as a great enemy. I think, actually, the physical training kind of gave me some kind of confidence, weirdly. And of course the costumes and all of this. It's funny because in drama school I used to like playing Lady Macbeth or Cleopatra, so to be at the head of a ship was kind of -- I felt like a little girl. Like, fun and, as you said, to go "all the way." And she's such a mad character; she's bonkers, you know. She's a man in a woman's body. She's so driven by vengeance, that she becomes quite blind.

You mention fun. Maybe that would have been the better way to word it because you look like you're having the time of your life.
It's jubilating! Of course, you cut heads and kill people, which is all great. But she's so mad that you kind of, yeah, you just let it all out. With playing evil characters, you have to find some jubilation in it. Otherwise, it's kind of not fun.

You mentioned being worried about having authority. For me, once I see someone make out with a severed head, I am not going to defy that person.
[Laughs] Yes. Exactly. I mean, she can't tolerate cowards or incompetence.

What was the actual thing you had to make out with?
Well, it was the actor in the beginning, then we had a dummy -- like a fake head on a wire. And I had to hold the head and it was so heavy. Ah, that was mad. I had some guys helping me to lift it.

I'm harping on this, but it's fun to watch an actor have fun with a role because an audience member can tell.
It's important. You know, I'm a big fan of Jack Nicholson, actually. And there's always that jubilation he has and that's the key -- to find those nice butterflies in your stomach when you go on set.

And now, technically, you can say you've worked with Michael Fassbender.
I wish!

He's in the movie.
He is?!

It's old footage, but he's there.
I can show off now. You're making my day.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter. ]]>'Non-Stop': A Live Blog By Someone Who Is Afraid To Flytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-04T16:13:13-05:002014-03-04T16:59:01-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/especially a movie that is currently number one at the box office, as is the case with the Liam Neeson thriller “Non-Stop.” Now, I did my best to avoid “Non-Stop” because, frankly, I am terrified of flying and this movie happens to be about a distressed commercial airliner. There was no way I was going to see “Non-Stop” unless Liam Neeson himself wanted to take me on a tour of New York City. No way.

Now, my hope was that “Non-Stop” would have a modest weekend at the box office, then drift off into obscurity. Instead, it’s the number one movie at the box office –- grossing just under $50 million so far worldwide -- and it’s apparent I just can’t ignore this movie any longer.

So, on Tuesday morning, I bought a ticket to “Non-Stop” at the Beekman Theater on Manhattan’s Upper East Side and attempted to face my fears. While watching, I kept a running diary. Here’s how that all went. (Yes, some spoilers ahead.)

11:57 a.m.: “Non-Stop” opens with a shot of Liam Neeson at the airport with a distressed look on his face, drinking booze. I completely relate to everything that’s going on in this movie so far.

12:00 p.m.: I am three minutes into this movie and I am miserable.

12:05 p.m.: Honestly, this is the fanciest commercial airliner I have ever seen.

12:06 p.m.: I can only assume that these people are flying Truffle Air.

12:07 p.m.: Lupita Nyong’o is in this movie. She just won an Oscar. She’s playing a flight attendant.

12:08 p.m.: Liam Neeson is freaking out a bit as the plane takes off because it frightens him. I will not be surprised if I see my name in the credits as “How To Act Like A Nervous Airplane Passenger Consultant.”

12:09 p.m.: Julianne Moore just reclined her seat all the way back after takeoff. I can only assume that I’m sitting right behind her.

1:03 p.m.: The passengers are watching their own ordeal on the in flight satellite TV that Air Truffle offers. They are getting news of their impending death from Pat Kiernan on NY 1.

1:07 p.m.: You know, I’ve had worse flights.

1:08 p.m.: Okay, so there’s a bomb on the plane that they have found and it’s right in front of them. Can’t they just fly low, open the door and throw it out of the plane?

1:10 p.m.: I am going to name my first born “Scoot.”

1:15 p.m.: Okay! So it was just explained why they can’t just through the bomb out of the plane.

1:19 p.m.: I just remembered that Lupita Nyong’o is still in this movie. She walked by. I think she said something, too.

1:24 p.m.: While mocking Liam Neeson, the bad guy just said, “Do you have any idea how easy this was.” If I’m being honest, all of this seemed extremely complicated.

1:28 p.m.: The plane is in freefall.

1:28 p.m.: Oh my god I hate this.

1:29 p.m.: I have nightmares about this very thing.

1:30 p.m.: They are in zero gravity now. Of course, Liam Neeson uses this predicament to do something cool.

1:32 p.m.: I never want to be on a plane in which the only surviving pilot is whispering to himself, “Come on, you can do this,” as he tries to land.

1:34 p.m.: The Air Truffle flight has crash landed on a runway in Iceland. But everyone seems okay! (Well, except for the people who got shot.)

1:36 p.m.: How are these people getting home? Will they get on another plane? I’d take a boat. I might take a boat from now on anyway.

1:36 p.m.: And the end credits roll.

1:37 p.m.: That was okay.

1:40 p.m.: This is a small theater that only has two theaters. As I’m leaving, a man approaches the box office -– where it clearly says “Non-Stop” and “American Hustle” –- and asks, “Hey, you guys got that 'Wolf of Wall Street'? The person at the box office responds, “No, just 'American Hustle' and 'Non-Stop.'" The man ponders this response for a few second, looks at the person behind the counter and says, “Nah,” then walks away into the abyss.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Jeff Goldblum Talks 'The Grand Budapest Hotel,' Then Dodges A Falling Table With Cat-Like Reflexestag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-04T10:38:29-05:002014-03-04T10:59:01-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/and a bottle of water with the reflexes of a cheetah. So, yeah, that's pretty memorable, too.

Goldblum is in this weekend's new Wes Anderson film, "The Grand Budapest Hotel." Goldblum plays Deputy Kovacs, a man responsible for dividing up the vast fortune that was left behind after the death of an eccentric widow who frequented the aforementioned Grand Budapest Hotel.

It's almost impossible to present here a "preview," if you will, of what to expect below with an interview with a man as purposefully discombobulated as Jeff Goldblum. (Well, except for that whole table incident.) In person, Goldblum -- who is without a doubt a sharp-looking man -- will drift in and out of topics, giving the whole proceeding the feeling of whimsical frenzy. Anyway, the good news is that even though my clumsiness could have killed Jeff Goldblum, Jeff Goldblum escaped this interview unscathed.

Jeff Goldblum: What's your last name?

Ryan.
Mike Ryan -- movie star name. You could play a sheriff in a movie. The action hero, Mike Ryan -- all fighting, all loving, once again.

I believe that's you in "Silverado."
Oh, yes, really? All fighting, all loving? Yeah, that's me. That's me. Jeff Goldblum is sheriff Mike Ryan. Yeah, that would be good.

I like this interview so far.
Yeah.

Let's talk about "The Grand Budapest Hotel."
I bet a guy like you liked this movie.

I did.
It's great, isn't it?

You're a whimsical guy, I'm surprised you're not in more Wes Anderson movies. Why haven't you done more since "Life Aquatic"?
Maybe nothing was right for me. I don't know why. Who knows why? Or, if I never do another one, I'll be satisfied with what I've done. But, I would work with him any time and every time -- as I think every actor would. And, a final product! That's what you want to do: to do something that contributes to a movie that works.

So when you see it for the first time, you're thinking hot damn, we have something here?
Yeah, who knows what will happen to it, but, yeah, he's trying to make something beautiful and it's all subjective. I dig what he's doing.

I can guess what will happen: It will be a modest success at the box office, then it will be a beloved film forever. Wes Anderson movies seem to have that pattern.
Well, who knows? Who knows? This may be special in any way.

There is more action in it than what we're used to seeing.
There is more action. I love it.

I see the trend now. You're in his "violent" movies.
[Laughs] "Life Aquatic" was violent. Yeah, I swatted the dog in that.

It's always weird when I'm flipping through channels and see you in an old episode of "Laverne & Shirley" or "Starsky and Hutch," or something. Do you see those when you're flipping around?
I do!

What do you think?
How lucky I am to have stayed active. Sometimes I see things and not only is it a reminder that I've been at it, but, jeez, I got another chance after that.

"Annie Hall" is the famous one, but there you are as "Freak" in "Death Wish."
I know.

You don't just blend in. It's so obviously you.
I stick out like a sore thumb.

I'd say a recently manicured thumb.
Thank you so much -- with a sweet, sweet thumb ring on it.

Was there a particular movie you did when you realized those kind of television appearances were over? Was it "The Big Chill"?
I still make guest appearances! "Glee" and "Portlandia" and "The League."

That's different. You're doing those as "Jeff Goldblum," because you want to, not "actor who needs work."
Well, you know, I've progressed. I was never particularly careerist or, "Gee, how am I doing?" I've got good representatives and I check in with my market continuum. But, thank goodness, I mostly got in it for the wild, passionate adventure of doing something I loved. Luckily, those seeds have sort of germinated into even more clear activities everyday of putting my head down and just kind of enjoying making stuff. I do love it, more than ever, for the sheer sake of its own pleasure.

Is that a conscious decision? You've been showing up in stuff like "Portandia" and "Tim and Eric's Billion Dollar Movie" ...
I love them.

Off the wall stuff. But there was a part of your career where you did a television show like "Raines," which was very mainstream. Are you now embracing wackier material, compared to just a few years ago?
Hmm. That's interesting. Like I say, I've never been particularly strategic or careerist -- and I don't separate one period from the next. But, I think I've gotten more and more clear that I just want to do things that excite me for the sheer pleasure of it and work with people who interest me and delight me. And this would certainly fall into that category. There's nothing to get out of this -- that I'm looking for, at least -- except the sheer pleasure of doing it.

You mention being delighted, one of the scenes that delights me to no end is the closing credits of "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension."

Thank you so much! I love that movie. And Peter Weller and I started a band that I'm still playing with.

Is he still playing in it?
He hasn't been in it for awhile. He's off and doing spectacular things, but I have a core group that is a later version of that thing that started and I do it every week -- at Rockwell in Los Feliz, whenever I'm not working. How did we start talking about that? We were talking about? We went from music with Peter Weller to ... "Buckaroo Banzai"! The last scene of "Buckaroo Banzai"!

A lot of those characters die in the movie, but they all come back to do that fun walk.
Well, you know, Wes Anderson, when we did "Life Aquatic" said -- well, I don't know who said it first, maybe I said, "Hey, you know, this little bow that you do at the end, that sort of reminds me ..." And he said, "Well, I'm a big fan of that movie and that's kind of it. That's kind of what I'm doing." So, there you go.

[The publicist comes in to tell us our time is up.]

Oh, we're done? We're coming to the end? [As we stand up, my knee hits the underside of the table we are at, sending the table and the contents of the table, which include a bottle of water and half of a cup of coffee, toward Goldblum, who somehow dodges both.] Jesus! Almost a disaster. That should never happen. You saw me, did I lean on it? [A waiter comes in to ask if we are okay.] Yeah [laughs], everybody is okay. Mike says he's suing for everything.

How did that happen? I think I might have done that.
I don't know. That was a magical occurrence.

I almost killed you. I'm sorry.
It was almost tragic.

I would have had a good title for this story, though. But I would have felt terrible.
"Jeff Goldblum Dies, But We Had A Nice Chat."

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Zack Snyder Strikes Backtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-03T11:05:52-05:002014-03-03T11:59:01-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/
Even this past week, producer Joel Silver attacked Snyder's "Watchmen" -- a movie that Snyder admits below is his favorite film -- accusing the director of being a "slave to the material," then touting Terry Gilliam's proposed "Watchmen" movie. When I brought all of this up to Snyder, it was obvious that he was well aware of Silver's comments and he had some thoughts of his own on the Gilliam version.

Snyder and his wife, fellow producer Deborah Snyder -- who has produced all of Snyder's films -- are promoting "300: Rise of an Empire." Snyder didn't direct this sequel (which isn't really a sequel, as the events take place at the same time as the original "300"), and even with the delay until 2016 of Snyder's for-now-titled "Batman vs. Superman," he wouldn't have had the time. The directing duties fell to Noam Murro for "Rise of an Empire," but Snyder's fingerprints are all over this film.

Ahead, Snyder responds to Silver's accusations and discusses his relationship with critics in general. Plus, in a world filled with leak after leak when it comes to big-budget superhero movies, the Snyders discuss the leak of the "Batman vs. Superman" announcement, which happened hours before what was supposed to be a Comic-Con reveal and how that's affected the way they've announced the casting of Ben Affleck as Batman, Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor.

With "300: Rise of an Empire," this is the first time you've produced a movie and not also directed the movie. Is that odd?

Zack Snyder: Yeah, right. And also, having written it, you're really deep in it when you're writing it. And then, suddenly, you hand it over and you're like, "Well, that's that, I guess." I was around the whole time, it's just a difficult, but weirdly rewarding, process to see it all come to life. You wrote this thing and it's how, I guess, writers must feel when they show up to the premiere and go, "Oh my gosh, the movie is alive now."

Now that "Batman vs. Superman" was pushed back until 2016, could you now have had time to direct this?

Zack Snyder: No, no. That's why I couldn't do it. We would had to have been shooting now and, even then, we probably wouldn't have been able to because we're about to go shoot the new movie.

The original "300" was so important to you, career-wise. I feel you're still connected to this story.

Deborah Snyder: Yeah, we absolutely are. That's why when we made the decision and knew basically that Zack couldn't do it, to find someone who would share the same vision that we had. And it's a tricky thing, right? Because when you have the "300" name, there's an expectation from the audience of what this is going to be. Not just visually, but there's also just an attitude with what we did in the first film.

Visually, the first "300" was very unique. Since then, others have ... maybe "ripped off" is a harsh term...

Deborah Snyder: You can say "ripped off," I think that's fair.

Zack Snyder: An homage! [Laughs]

But now, because of that, seeing this style again isn't as unique of an experience. Is that a concern?

Deborah Snyder: No. Because I feel like what this one is -- it is "300." It's not an imitation. And it lives in the same world as the original, but it also builds upon it I think in a way that is unique. You know, the fact that it is on the water. And I'm not a huge fan of 3D and I prefer to see movies in 2D. But this really lends itself to 3D and I think our fan-base will appreciate that it ups the ante.

Was "Watchmen" the most "damned if you do, damned if you don't" project you've ever been a part of? Now Joel Silver is criticizing you for being a "slave" to the source material while touting a very different from the source material script that Terry Gilliam was going to film.

Zack Snyder: It's funny, because the biggest knock against the movie is that we finally changed the ending, right?

Right, you used Dr. Manhattan as the threat to bring the world together as opposed to the alien squid.

Zack Snyder: Right, and if you read the Gilliam ending, it's completely insane.

Deborah Snyder: The fans would have been thinking that they were smoking crack.

Zack Snyder: Yeah, the fans would have stormed the castle on that one. So, honestly, I made "Watchmen" for myself. It's probably my favorite movie that I've made. And I love the graphic novel and I really love everything about the movie. I love the style. I just love the movie and it was a labor of love. And I made it because I knew that the studio would have made the movie anyway and they would have made it crazy. So, finally I made it to save it from the Terry Gilliams of this world.

In Gilliam's version, Dr. Manhattan is convinced to go back in time and prevent Dr. Manhattan from existing. But the specter of his existence is the threat to the world, which is kind of what you did at the end of the movie anyway.

Zack Snyder: Right, of course. It's just using elements that are in the comic book already, that's the only thing I did. I would not have grabbed something from out of the air and said, "Oh, here's a cool ending" just because it's cool.

Deborah Snyder: But it's interesting because, you're right, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. You have people who are mad that the ending was changed and you have other people saying, "Oh, it was a slave to the graphic novel." You can't please everybody.

Zack Snyder: And that's the problem with genre. That's the problem with comic book movies and genre. And I believe that we've evolved -- I believe that the audiences have evolved. I feel like "Watchmen" came out at sort of the height of the snarky Internet fanboy -- like, when he had his biggest strength. And I think if that movie came out now -- and this is just my opinion -- because now that we've had "Avengers" and comic book culture is well established, I think people would realize that the movie is a satire. You know, the whole movie is a satire. It's a genre-busting movie. The graphic novel was written to analyze the graphic novel -- and comic books and the Cold War and politics and the place that comic books play in the mythology of pop culture. I guess that's what I'm getting at with the end of "Watchmen" -- in the end, the most important thing with the end was that it tells the story of the graphic novel. The morality tale of the graphic novel is still told exactly as it was told in the graphic novel -- I used slightly different devices. The Gilliam version, if you look at it, it has nothing to do with the idea that is the end of the graphic novel. And that's the thing that I would go, "Well, then don't do it." It doesn't make any sense.

I can't imagine people being happy with that version.

Zack Snyder: Yeah! If you love the graphic novel, there's just no way. It would be like if you were doing "Romeo and Juliet" and instead of them waking up in the grave area, they would have time-traveled back in time and none of it would have happened.

Over your career, do you feel critics have been fair to you?

Zack Snyder: I don't know. You know, it's a funny thing that you should bring it up. I always feel like -- and I always believe the movies I've made are smarter than the way they are perceived by sort of mass culture and by the critics. We set out to make smarter movies than what they're perceived to be, do you know what I mean?

Deborah Snyder: I think it has to do, in a way, because I've thought about it, and I think some of it maybe is that if they have a visual style -- if they're from a graphic novel, if they happen to be genre -- I think people sometimes don't want to look to see if there's a deeper meaning. To see if there's symbolism, to see if there's other things going on. It's easier to dismiss it and say, "Oh, it looks like a video game."

That's interesting, because people can have the debate over what Superman did or didn't do at the end of "Man of Steel," but, visually, it looks a lot different than your prior work.

Zack Snyder: From the beginning, I had a philosophical approach to what I would do with Superman. And I always sum it up by saying that the most realistic movie I've made is a movie about Superman --because that's what I felt like the movie needed.

Did you ever consider making it with a different visual style?

Zack Snyder: No. I mean, I had a knee-jerk reaction to that script that was "this movie needs to feel like it's stone-cold real." And that was, to me, ironic and I'm always looking for some ironic element within the storytelling -- like some bit of meta. For me to get excited about it, it needs to infiltrate the movie. And for me, that was that a Superman movie would be real.

I was in Hall H at Comic Con this past July when you announced "Batman vs. Superman." The news of that movie had leaked a few hours prior to your announcement. Are leaks disappointing to you?

Zack Snyder: Yes and no. [The leak] was definitely not a planned thing.

Deborah Snyder: Things get leaked so often these days, it's a shame because even casing announcements, or whatever, you're in the middle of a process and sometimes they're so off base -- and then it gets picked up by multiple places and it's all over the place.

Like Adam Driver being Nightwing, which wasn't true.

Deborah Snyder: Or some of it, you're just having conversations, but that doesn't mean they are a contender, but you're just exploring and it gets made public. It's kind of a shame that you can't go through the process in a pure way and then be able to announce it in a way that's exciting. With the [Comic-Con] announcement, there was rumblings and we were like, "Aw." Because we wanted to bring it to the fans. We wanted to bring them something special. We went to Comic-Con for "Watchmen" and we were bringing the cast to announce it and it got leaked a couple of days before. We wanted to give that to them and we got cheated out of it.

Zack Snyder: I think it does another thing. The leak becomes the audience involvement. They are now part of it, the process. Do you know what I mean? And you have to take that as the world we live in, as opposed to "Oh, that's too bad."

I am under the impression that the three big casting announcements that weren't wrong -- Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot and Jesse Eisenberg -- were done on your timetable. Is that accurate?

Zack Snyder: That is accurate.

And nobody saw those coming.

Zack Snyder: Right! And that was fun. That's fun for us when we're able to announce Jesse Eisenberg to the audience.

Deborah Snyder: Everyone was like, "What?! Ah!"

Zack Snyder: Yeah, that's fun.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>'SNL' Scorecard: Did Jim Parsons Poop His Pants On Colin Jost's First Show?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-03-02T10:31:49-05:002014-03-02T15:59:02-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/starting to gel, then comes a long break and the loss of the most tenured cast member and, boom, it feels like we’re almost starting over again. This Jim Parsons-hosted show had the nervous jitters of a season opener, not a show from March. And Parsons was fine, but it’s almost as if the vibe made him look nervous at times, too.

Sketch of the Night

”Bird Bible” (O’Brien, McKinnon) I am honestly surprised that this aired when it did in the show -- and good for Mike O’Brien to get something so obviously his and so obviously weird on that early in the proceedings. And a special congratulations has to be given out to whoever it was that actually illustrated the Bird Bible – top-notch work, there.

Score: 8.5

The Good

”Dance Floor Killer” (Bennett, Parsons, Ensemble) The sight of the cast, dancing around to the songs of the ‘80s, while a stoic and sinister -- and obviously a serial killer -- Jim Parsons stares off into the distance was my favorite visual gag of the show. I almost wish the sketch had not elaborated on this any further, which eventually ended with Parsons verbally outing himself as the killer. I kind of just wish the whole sketch was the dance show with Pasrons just standing there looking evil, yet no one suspects he’s the killer.

Score: 7.0

”12 Years Auditions” (Thompson, Bayer, Strong, Wheelan, Zamata, O’Brien Parsons, Pharoah) First, I never thought the day would come that someone portrayed “12 Years” director Steve McQueen on “SNL” – and, well, here we are! Well, I’ll give credit to “SNL” for this: “12 Years a Slave” has often -– and rightfully so -- been described as a movie that can’t be parodied because of its subject matter. I can only imagine that was looked upon as a sort of a challenge. And, you know, I think they pulled it off. Strangely, the situation depicted has crossed my mind. Like, when Paul Dano showed up for his audition and looks at that dialogue, good grief, how do you say that? Also, Jay Pharoah has the best “I have my eye on you” look of maybe anyone alive today.

Score: 7.0

”Spotlightz” (Bayer, Parsons, Wells, Killam, Zamata, Bryant) There’s really only one real reason that this is funny and it’s because no one does a better “I’m a child and I’m acting” voice than Vanessa Bayer. I am entranced by this voice.

Score: 6.8

”Weekend Update” (Strong, Jost, Pharoah, Thompson, Killam) I’m starting to not like this new trend of late night personalities telling me how much it means to them to be on my television entertaining me. It’s one thing when someone is saying goodbye, but on a first show -– Fallon did it on his first “Tonight Show," Colin Jost did it here on “Update” -– it just feels too sentimental. Instead of taking a moment to audibly “take it all in,” Jost should have, instead, just come out of the gates firing.

I once wrote that it’s almost as if Seth Meyers was created in a test tube for the sole purpose of hosting “Weekend Update.” That’s not the case for Jost –- and no one is doubting that Jost is funny; he's been a writer at "SNL" since 2005 and is currently co-head writer -- he’s just going to have to work hard to become good at hosting "Update." And, look, it was his first show, so it’s forgivable that he has that wide-eyed look of a new morning anchor just out of journalism school. If you go back and look at Cecily Strong’s first “Update” compared to now, it’s night and day. (Speaking of Strong, I wish there had been more interaction between her and Jost.) It’s just a shame that the way the schedule is set up, by the time he gets into a grove, it will probably be right when the cast breaks for the summer. Right now, “Weekend Update” is officially a work in progress.

Pharoah and Thompson were fine, as always, as Shaquille O’Neal and Charles Barkley (though, it’s almost an odd pairing because Thompson’s Barkley sides on the goofy side while Pharoah’s Shaq is disturbingly canny). Though, it was Killam’s Jebediah Atkinson going through each Best Picture nominee that made “Update” last night. It’s almost as if Killam’s little accidental trick that he did with his index card proves that this character is magic.

”Elevator” (Parsons, O’Brien, Bryant, Thompson) Well, what a nice night for Mike O’Brien. He gets his terrific “Bird Bible” sketch on the air and his “guy poops his pants after a bomb goes off” sketch. I mean, that’s really running the gauntlet between subjects.

Score: 6.0

The Bad

”Jim Parsons Monologue” (Parsons, Pharoah, Moynihan, Killam, Thompson, McKinnon) Boy, Bobby Moynihan sure does play a creepy George Costanza. Parsons tripped over a couple of lines, but the parade of former television stars was fine. But did anyone out there really think that in real life Jim Parsons is a scientist who loves “Star Trek”? Is this a real problem for him? I suppose it could be?

Score: 5.0

”Cold Open: The Ellen DeGeneres Show” (McKinnon, Pedrad, Bayer, Pharoah, Parsons, Thompson) Kate McKinnon’s Ellen DeGeneres impression is still a delight. And with DeGeneres hosting the Oscars on Sunday night, it was a good bet that we’d see DeGeneres in some capacity during the show. Though, it is surprising that this sketch wasn’t about the Oscars instead of just another sketch about DeGeneres’ daily talk show. “SNL” has on staff the person who does the definitive impression of tonight’s Oscar host and they don’t do an Oscar sketch. This seems like a big missed opportunity.

Score: 4.3

”Murder Mystery” (Killam, Zamata, Parsons, Strong, Bennett, McKinnon) The premise started off strong: Everyone is given wacky character traits – except for Parsons, who is given very vague instructions. The problem is, this is a really funny idea, but it just doesn’t go anywhere. Like, it’s much funnier to just hear the concept versus actually watching this sketch not know how to play itself out.

Score: 4.0

”Cowboys” (Bennett, Parsons, Wheelan, Thompson, Mooney) Especially airing in the ten to one timeslot, I wish this had just gone “all in” and been weirder than it actually was. It’s as if it couldn’t quite pick its tone. “Am I a weird sketch? Am I a mainstream sketch about a birthday? Whoa, I get surprisingly violent at the end there, don’t I?”

Score: 3.5

The Ugly

”Peter Pan” (Parsons, Bryant, Milhiser, Mooney, McKinnon, Moynihan) Tinkerbell? More like Stinkerbell. (Ugh, I’m sorry, it’s early.) Anyway, this was not great. And with a couple of actual gems spread throughout the show, it’s just strange this aired so early and brought the show to a thud. Why something like Vanessa Bayer’s “Spotlightz Acting Camp” wasn’t in this slot, I will never understand. Perhaps this played better at dress, but this seemed dead on arrival during the live show.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter. Click below for this week's "SNL," Not Ready For Primetime Podcast featuring Mike Ryan and Hitfix's Ryan McGee.

]]>Should You See The 'Super-Sized R-Rated Version' Of 'Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues'?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-02-28T15:55:17-05:002014-02-28T15:59:01-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/does seem like a bit of a cash-grab and if you’ve ever watched the deleted-scenes movie, “Wake Up Ron Burgundy,” that came with the "Anchorman" DVD, you know that not everything that was thrown on the cutting room floor from the first film is comedic gold.

Is there any reason to see this new version? Well, that all depends. Below, we answer this question for you.

Did you hate “Anchorman 2: The Legend of Ron Burgundy”? If the answer is:

Yes: Then you shouldn’t see the new version of “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.”

No: Then you might want to see the new version of “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.” Keep reading.

Did you love the first “Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy” but were disappointed by “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues”? If the answer is:

I hated both of them: Then you shouldn’t see the new version of “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.”

Yes: Then, yes, you probably should see “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.”

Did you wish the jokes went further and were more profane in “Anchorman 2: The Legend of Ron Burgundy”? If the answer is:

Yes: Then you should see “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.”

In a perfect world, should this version just have been released as the only version in the first place?

Yes. But, in a perfect world, studios wouldn’t worry about losing money because their movie is rated-R and not rated PG-13, like the original version is rated.

What makes this version rated-R?

Let’s just say that the scene where Brian Fontana (Paul Rudd) shows off his condom collection in this new version would be enough on its own to score an R-rating. Also, at one point, Ron Burgundy uses a word that starts with a “C” and rhymes with “rock.” Another also: in the lighthouse, when Ron is complaining about his inability to masturbate, the joke is taken a lot further, as Champ Kind (David Koechner) offers Ron some help.

If I like musical numbers, will I like this new version?

The one glaring negative about this version of “Anchorman 2” is that it doesn’t include Ron Burgundy’s musical ode to his shark, Doby. Doby is still certainly in the movie, but his role has been shortened. The film no longer starts with adult Doby’s attack on Ron, nor is that scene included at the end of the film. Though, in this version, while in captivity, Doby does eat a local elderly man.

Instead, however, there’s a huge musical number closer to the beginning of the movie where the News Team performs a song called “Big World,” which leads into another song called “If I Was Gay For a Day.” (The scene we see from the original trailer of the News Team asking a gay co-worker questions like “Do you sleep in a coffin?” that weren’t in the original final film are included in this performance.)

Is this version of “Anchorman: The Legend Continues” funnier than the original version?

Yes. And, look, I pretty much went to this movie out of spite, almost to prove how dumb it was to release the same movie, only with “new jokes.” Instead, I found myself sitting alone in an almost empty theater early on a Friday morning laughing out loud. It’s not just because the characters can freely use “f-bombs” throughout the film, but the jokes are given more time to develop -– hence the longer running time. Put it this way: In the original version, I didn’t find the scene in which Ron has dinner with Linda’s (Meagan Good) parents very funny. In this version, I had to cover my mouth because I was laughing too hard. The punchlines now have a much better setup.

It’s almost like this movie has the room to breathe that the first “Anchorman” had and feels much more in line with the tone of the first movie.

Did you wish that Kanye West made a Kajagoogoo reference in “Anchorman 2: The Legend of Ron Burgundy”? If the answer is:

Yes: Yes, you will want to see this new version of “Anchorman 2 : The Legend Continues.”

Other than tone and the use of expletives, what are the major differences between this version of “Anchorman 2” and the original version of “Anchorman 2”?

The structure of the two films is similar. Ron still gets fired from his New York City anchor job, returns to San Diego, then is offered a job back in New York at a 24-hour news network. (In this version, Ron is told that his team will be young reporters named Peter Jennings, Bob Costas and David Letterman. Ron calls them “jerkoffs” and demands his old News Team.)

Though, I’d guess that around 80 percent of the dialogue is different. It’s not just new “jokes” –- as the commercials advertise –- but all new lines of dialogue.

For example, in this version, when the News Team meets Linda Jackson for the first time, Ron goes on and on about how much he loves the Diana Ross movie, “The Wiz.” Brick (Steve Carell) adds that his favorite movie is “Carrot.” Later, it’s used as a pretty funny callback when Brick is hiding and they need him to come out, “Come on, Brick, we’re going to watch ‘Carrot.’”

Another example: When Ron shows back up at Veronica’s (Christina Applegate) townhouse and meets Gary (Greg Kinnear), Ron makes up a story that he, too, had a new lover and that her name is Rick Volcano.

Did you wish that Champ Kind used a throwing star to kill Amy Poehler’s entertainment reporter in the original “Anchorman 2: The Legend of Ron Burgundy”? If the answer is:

Yes: Yes, you will want to see this new version of “Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues.”

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>Jeff Goldblum Hasn't Been Called For 'Jurassic World'tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2014-02-27T08:36:08-05:002014-02-27T08:59:01-05:00Mike Ryanhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ryan/and the fact that two of his most well known blockbusters -- "Independence Day" and "Jurassic Park" -- will be adding new sequels soon.

When you hear about "Jurassic World," do you think to yourself, I could still do that? I know you didn't come back for "Jurassic Park III."
Yeah, and they haven't called me for "4," I know Steven Spielberg isn't directing it ...

Is that why you didn't do the third movie, because Spielberg didn't direct it?
No. Nobody asked me.

I didn't know that. I always assumed it was your decision.
No, nobody asked me, but I was perfectly satisfied with the two that I did. I'm still satisfied with that and I'll be the first in line to see anything else, so, you know. But, "Independence Day" ...

When I spoke to Roland Emmerich last summer, he was adamant you were coming back, along with Judd Hirsch and everyone else except Will Smith.
Oh, good, so he's talked about it. Yeah, they've talked to me about it and I've talked to them about it and they're excited and I'm anxious and eager to see -- I haven't read anything -- what they cook up. You know, I think they're trying to put it together.

Mike Ryan is senior writer for Huffington Post Entertainment. You can contact him directly on Twitter.]]>